header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 October 2012 / Christopher Cant
Issue: 7534 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Criminal gains

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
istock_000009413571medium_4

Can a criminal squatter acquire title by adverse possession? Christopher Cant investigates

Criminal entry onto land will not block a claim to title based on adverse possession. Will the new offence aimed at residential squatters prevent such a squatter succeeding with an adverse possession claim?

Section 144 of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 makes it an offence to squat in a residential building from 1 September 2012. Previously s 7 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 (CLA 1977) made it an offence for a trespasser not to leave having been asked to do so by a “displaced residential owner” or a “protected intending occupier”. The new offence applies to all residential buildings whether or not vacant immediately prior to the trespass and whether or not a request to leave has been made.

The elements of the offence set out in sub-section (1) are:

  1. the person is in a residential building as a trespasser having entered it as a trespasser;
  2. the person knows or ought to know that he or she
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll